By Lisa Mascaro

Of all the rules of politics that Donald Trump has broken in his run for the White House, his way with words may top the list.

Perhaps not since Sarah Palin gave Americans her tossed-word salads has a candidate’s speech pattern been so debated, celebrated and mocked.

But Trump is more than just a free-style rambler. Experts say he employs a very deliberate, effective communications approach unlike any other presidential candidate in memory.

The Trumpisms — “Believe me,” “People say,”  “Sad!” — have become so well known they are the subject of spoofs. But like a savvy salesman or break-through advertising campaign, Trump’s techniques carry a quiet power.

Here’s a breakdown of Trump-speak.

The art of the insult

Little Marco. Lyin’ Ted. Crooked Hillary. Even in the rough-and-tumble world of presidential politics, Trump has taken the art of the insult to a new level.

Trump’s name-calling may sound like simple bullying. But labeling his opponents with cutting nicknames also creates simple frames — catch phrases — that stick in voters’ minds, often because they reinforce existing perceptions.

George Lakoff, a linguistics professor at UC Berkeley who has written extensively about political speech, says studies show that 98% of thought is unconscious. Creating those nicknames is a way to make the broader message resonate with voters long after the rallies have ended — like a good advertising jingle.

“Even if he loses the election, Trump will have changed the brains of millions of Americans, with future consequences,” Lakoff writes on his blog.

As a businessman, Trump learned that speaking in an irreverent, shock-jock manner often won him free media attention. Now some Trump supporters are cheering that same willingness to give voice to politically incorrect opinions that they may secretly share, but would never say out loud.

Among the most controversial examples were his description of Mexican immigrants as “rapists” and his pondering of whether the Muslim mother of a U.S. Army captain killed in Iraq wasn’t “allowed” to speak alongside her husband at the Democratic convention.

“He has this great talent for, any time there’s a lull, he goes and grabs up all the attention again,” said Barton Swaim, author of “The Speechwriter: A Brief Education in Politics.” “I’m out of the business of predicting how he won’t go to the next level.”

Say it. Repeat it. Say it again.

It’s a crescendo of almost every Trump rally, the call-and-response moment when Trump promises to build a “great wall” along the Southern border. “Who’s going to pay for it?” he asks. “Mexico!” the crowd answers.

Of course the Mexican president has said unequivocally that his country will not be paying for Trump’s wall. But that hardly matters. In Trump’s world, repeating something makes it seem true, even when it’s demonstrably not.

For example, Trump continues to insist that he warned against entering the 2003 Iraq War, despite a 2002 audio clip of him voicing support. He has repeatedly claimed to have watched TV footage of Muslims in New Jersey cheering on 9/11, despite no evidence of such an event.

He often repeats false claims that inner-city crime is at record highs or that neighbors of the San Bernardino terrorists saw bomb-making materials in their apartment but did not report it.

“The more a word is heard, the more the circuit is activated and the stronger it gets, and so the easier it is to fire again,” Lakoff writes. “Trump repeats. Win. Win. Win. We’re gonna win so much you’ll get tired of winning.’”

Continue reading, LA Times.

By Seema Mehta

As Donald Trump tries to increase his appeal to moderate suburban women, the GOP presidential nominee on Tuesday unveiled plans for paid family leave and child care.

“Many Americans are just one crisis away from disaster – a sick kid, a lost job, a damaged home. There is no financial security in our country, especially anymore,” Trump told supporters during a shorter-than-usual rally in a Philadelphia suburb. He described his plans as “pro-family, it’s pro-child, it’s pro-worker. These are the people we have to take care of.”

Trump proposed offering six weeks of paid maternity leave and a tax deduction for child-care and elder-care costs. Low-income workers who don’t have any taxable income would receive a child-care rebate in the form of an earned income tax credit.

Trump also called for the creation of a dependent-care savings account that is not tied to an employer, where parents could deposit tax-free money for child care, enrichment activities, school tuition and elder care. Low-income workers would receive matching funds from the federal government.

The Republican nominee does not say how he would pay for any of this, with the exception of the paid maternity leave that his campaign estimated would cost about $3.4 billion a year. Trump says he would fund the leave program by eliminating fraud and improper payment in the unemployment system. He pledged to outline on Thursday his full economic plan, which he said would be balanced through job growth and budget cuts.

Continue reading, LA Times.

 

Left-wing groups warn the Democratic nominee not to appoint Wall Street-linked Lael Brainard or Tom Nides to senior finance and economic jobs.

By Edward-Isaac Dovere

Still bruised by what they see as Barack Obama’s betrayals and worried that Hillary Clinton isn’t really one of them, progressives are preparing to move hard and quickly to force her hand if she wins the White House.

To start, progressive operatives say they’ve targeted two potential Clinton appointments — Tom Nides as chief of staff and Lael Brainard as Treasury secretary or trade representative — to lay down early markers against Clinton. Pick them, they warn, and progressives will punish her.

Nides, who was one of Clinton’s deputies at the State Department and is now back at investment bank Morgan Stanley, is “out of central casting for the Wall Street revolving door,” said one of the people involved with the discussions.

Brainard, a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors whose career dates back to Bill Clinton’s administration, is seen by progressives as precisely the kind of establishment figure who wouldn’t represent the turn on trade policy that they demand, despite Clinton’s repeated insistence that she will oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

“Putting Brainard in a position that would oversee anything about the administration’s trade policies would be a direct rebuke to a series of promises that Clinton and [campaign chair John] Podesta have made throughout 2016,” said another person involved in the discussions. “I don’t think that Brainard can be seen as a person that could implement in good conscience the trade views that Clinton has been talking about through this election season.”

Aides to Sen. Elizabeth Warren have been meeting regularly with Clinton’s campaign policy advisers. Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are beginning to plan how they would lobby her White House on legislation. Activists are at the early stages of thinking through what community protests and digital organizing would look like to pressure a new Democratic president whom they’ve only ever grudgingly accepted.

Clinton, meanwhile, continues to take note of who is active on her behalf during the campaign, said a Democrat close to her, offering a little advice: If you want to have an impact in February, it helps to show up big in October.

Clinton acknowledges the atmosphere has shifted to make pulling to the left smarter politics, and she’s put out a detailed agenda that gets at much of what progressives are talking about. Yet some Clinton insiders also note that the ultra-progressive Democratic Party platform that activists argue should be a road map for a Clinton presidency was to them an easy but nonbinding way to get Bernie Sanders and his supporters off her back.

Many progressives, though, say they’ve moved past the debate over what’s in Clinton’s heart.

“That’s kind of the wrong question,” said Kurt Walters of the activist group Rootstrikers, which is involved with an effort to make Clinton rule out Wall Street bankers from top jobs. “Any political actor responds to incentives.”

They feel they trusted Obama too much, only to see him appoint Rahm Emanuel, Tim Geithner and Larry Summers at the outset of his administration, and then spend the next eight years all too often starting from the middle in bargaining with Republicans.

“People are going into this with much more eyes wide open about how much of a movement we need to build,” said Jonathan Westin, director of New York Communities for Change.

The early threats might be moot. Nides, though often talking to the candidate and top advisers, has told people he’s more interested in a national security or foreign policy job than what he and Clinton would have to go through to appoint him.

“He’s realistic about what the possibilities are,” said a friend. “I think he knows he’s not going to be chief of staff, and he doesn’t want it.”

Continue reading on Politico.

By Joel B. Pollak

San Francisco Bay Area NPR affiliate KQED has published a comic book guide to Donald Trump’s immigration policy, aimed at students, which is titled “Fear of Foreigners” and casts Trump as part of the “History of Nativism in America.”

The comic book slide show, illustrated by Andy Warner, is part of KQED’s series “The Lowdown,” described by the station as “Connecting newsroom to classroom,” and is presented among “lesson plans and education guides” for teachers to use.

The “lesson” consists of twelve panels, starting with two panels depicting the Republican presidential nominee commenting on Mexican immigrants and proposing to shut down Muslim immigration. It goes on to explain: “Some Americans find his rhetoric alarming, but it follows a long tradition of anti-immigrant public discourse.”

Subsequent panels trace hostility to immigration from Benjamin Franklin in the mid-18th century, to the Know-Nothings of the 1850s, through the anti-Catholic Ku Klux Klan, the internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II by FDR, and California’s own Proposition 187 in 1994.

The series misses important facts and dates, and provides little historical context. For example, it leaves out the Immigration Act of 1924, arguably the most important law restricting Jewish migration in the interwar period, preferring to dwell instead on antisemitism by the KKK, Henry Ford, and Charles Lindbergh, which serves the purpose of demonizing America without actually explaining the anti-immigration backlash. And if America was so terrible to Jews, who were fleeing real persecution in Russia and elsewhere, why did they flock to the U.S.? Warner does not interrupt his indictment of America to explain.

Nowhere does Warner mention the real problems of anarchism and communism among immigrant communities in the early 20th century. The illustrations also fail to mention the problem of radical Islam among present immigrants from the Muslim world, until a brief allusion at the end: “the nation remains on edge after recent ISIS-inspired attacks.” And the series makes little effort to distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants, casting all hostility to our present immigration policy as the result of prejudice and economic insecurity, ignoring genuine public concerns for sovereignty, security, and the rule of law.

Continue reading on Breitbart.

By Reid Wilson, Garrett Evans, Sarah Mearhoff and Joe DiSipio

Brace yourselves: Election Day has begun.

Some federal write-in absentee ballots, which are typically reserved for people serving dangerous foreign deployments or stints on submarines, have already started to come in. And that trickle of ballots will soon become a flood, with early voting set to begin in several states around the country.

The first round of early ballots will be dropped in the mail in North Carolina on Friday, kicking off a nearly nine-week sprint of early and absentee voting before the final results are tallied on Nov. 8.

Alabama elections officials will begin putting ballots in the mail on Sept. 15. By the following week, ballots from all 50 states will be on their way to members of the Armed Services and registered voters living abroad.

On September 23, voters in Minnesota will be the first with a chance to cast their ballots early, at in-person locations around the state. Polls open in South Dakota and Michigan the following day. By the end of September, voters in seven states will be able to cast ballots in person.

The popularity of early and absentee voting has exploded in the last decade and a half. In 2000, about one in five voters cast their ballots before Election Day. In 2016, more than a third of voters are likely to cast their ballots early this year, according to Michael McDonald, a political scientist who tracks the early vote at the University of Florida.

“We’ve been on an upward trend of early voting since really the late 1970s,” McDonald said. “Part of what we see in the upward trend is that more states will offer early voting options.”

Since the 2012 elections, in which 32 percent of voters cast ballots early, two states have made significant changes that give voters more access to early ballots: New Jersey now allows voters to obtain an absentee ballot without an excuse, four years after Hurricane Sandy shut down voting in some coastal cities. And Colorado now mails ballots to all of their registered voters.

Early voting can also help voters deal with a longer ballot, especially in states like Washington, California and Oregon where ballot measures can make for hours of reading.

“This year has a really loaded general election ballot, including a bumper crop of state and local measures, the White House, Congress, most of the legislature, judges and local races,” said Kim Wyman, Washington’s Secretary of State. “It is a lot to ask of our voters, and we’re pleased to have the convenience of vote-by-mail and a generous voting period, as we now think of ‘Election Day’ as being.”

Those who show up early are almost certainly hardened partisans, setting both parties on a scramble to chase their most likely supporters and bank as many votes as possible. The first to vote tend to be older, highly informed voters who are registered with a party — those likeliest to already know how they are going to vote. Those who show up later are younger, and much less likely to identify with a party.

Even before the first absentee ballots go out, the first vote has been cast. North Carolina officials said August 26 they had received a Federal Write-in Absentee Ballot from Francois Farge, a 51-year old Republican registered to vote in North Carolina but living in France.

Continue reading, Ballot Box at The Hill

 

By Amie Parnes

Hillary Clinton’s campaign is working the refs hard when it comes to reports about her health.

While Clinton responded to a fit of coughing this week with humor, saying she was “allergic” to GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, her aides and surrogates played the role of bad cop.

Campaign spokesman Nick Merrill took to task an NBC reporter who wrote about the coughing spell, posting on Twitter that the writer should “get a life.”

The five-paragraph story, by Andrew Rafferty, was titled “Hillary Clinton fights back coughing attack” and reported that the “frog in Clinton’s throat on Monday was one of the most aggressive she’s had during her 2016 run.”

Jon Favreau, a former speechwriter for President Obama, asked via Twitter if “anyone on NBC, or anywhere else,” was willing to defend the piece.

The pushback signaled that Clinton’s campaign intends to sharply counterattack news organizations that take questions about her health seriously.

“They’re trying to work the refs a little bit as they try to push back on the mainstream media’s willingness to pick up on some of this stuff that’s usually left to the fringes,” Clinton surrogate Jim Manley explained.

The Drudge Report and other conservative media sites have largely driven the coverage of Clinton’s health, following the concussion she suffered in late 2012 and years before she announced her intention to run again for president.

But Manley said the Democrat’s camp has seen the coverage “bleeding to the mainstream media” in recent weeks.

After Trump insinuated recently that Clinton wasn’t healthy, the campaign responded forcefully, ripping Trump allies for concocting fake documents from Clinton’s doctor.

“They’re trying to stop it,” Manley continued. “I think they learned a long time ago that you can’t just ignore these things. There’s always a fine line between react or not, but in this day in age, to say nothing is often not the best way to go.”

Clinton aides and supporters see the healthcare stories as a bunch of baloney, and they want the media to cover it as such.

One former Clinton aide called it a “complete farce, and the only way to handle it is to say in no uncertain terms that Donald Trump is full of it.”

The former aide also agreed that the Clinton campaign wants to put pressure on the press.

“I think that the fact that any mainstream publications would do anything but make this is a story about Donald Trump is completely out of the mainstream and why these claims have gotten worse,” the former aide said. “Some reporters have taken these claims at face value, and it’s the reason this story is still out there.”

Those around the Clinton campaign insist Clinton World isn’t worried that the health stories will damage her White House bid, though the latest pushback comes as polls of the race have tightened.

“The fact of the matter is there is no truth or factual evidence to debunk,” the former aide said. “She is perfectly healthy. The only way is to challenge him to a pushup contest at the first debate.”

New revelations about Clinton’s use of a private email server when she was secretary of State and a round of negative headlines about donors to the Clinton Foundation are mostly blamed for the closer poll results. Clinton continues to battle perceptions that she is untrustworthy, and the twin storylines have hurt her.

Allies, however, maintain that voters aren’t worried about the stories questioning her health.

“I think the media deserves to be beat up on this because I think it’s ridiculous. I really doubt that any American really cares about this,” said Democratic strategist Brad Bannon.

“This is as trivial as you can get. The media deserves pushback for giving so much coverage to this thing,” he added.

Both the Clinton and Trump campaigns have had a contentious relationship with the press.

Continue reading, The Hill

By Byron York

NBC’s “Commander in Chief Forum,” held Wednesday night aboard the USS Intrepid in New York, was the closest thing to a debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton until the real thing on Sept. 26. And it showed an advantage Trump might have when the two meet face-to-face: she has a record in government to defend, while he doesn’t. On that score, Trump, at 70 a newcomer to politics, seems new, while Clinton, at 68 a veteran of decades in public life, seems, well, not new.

The format of the NBC forum, in which the two candidates were separated by only a commercial break, put that contrast into higher relief than ever before.

Clinton cited her experience right out of the blocks, when moderator Matt Lauer asked her, “What is the most important characteristic that a commander in chief can possess?”

“Steadiness,” Clinton answered instantly. “An absolute rock steadiness, and mixed with strength to be able to make the hard decisions. Because I’ve had the unique experience of watching and working with several presidents …”

The problem for Clinton was that talk of her experience leads naturally to talk of what she has done — and that, in today’s campaign environment, means talk of her mishandling of classified information as secretary of state. “Why wasn’t it disqualifying?” was Lauer’s second question of the evening.

Then, when it came time for the military audience to ask questions of their own, the first for Clinton, from a retired naval officer, was brutal. “Secretary Clinton, how can you expect those such as myself who were and are entrusted with America’s most sensitive information to have any confidence in your leadership as president when you clearly corrupted our national security?”

Ouch. Clinton argued that she did not send or receive emails with a header marked “TOP SECRET” or the like. Maybe voters will find that convincing, and maybe they won’t. But it was a rocky start.

The next question, from Lauer, was about Clinton’s vote in 2003 to authorize the Iraq War.

Another audience member stood to ask: “You have had an extensive record with military intervention. How do you respond to progressives like myself who worry and have concerns that your hawkish foreign policy will continue?”

Continue reading, Washington Examiner

By Alex Swoyer

Hillary Clinton declared during NBC News’s Commander-in-Chief forum that no lives were lost in Libya when she made the move to take out dictator Muammar Gaddafi. Even so, the former secretary of state did not mention the fact that 11 months later four Americans — including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens — were killed in a terrorist attack in Benghazi that arose from the instability that the overthrow created.

“With respect to Libya, again, there’s no difference between my opponent and myself,” Clinton stated, attempting to dismiss her hawkish-foreign policy record. “He’s on record extensively supporting intervention in Libya when Qaddafi was threatening to massacre his population. I put together a coalition that included NATO, included the Arab League, and we were able to save lives.”

“We did not lose a single American in that action,” she declared.

Continue reading, Breitbart

By Phil Shiver

Mark Levin made the big announcement Tuesday night on his radio show after methodically walking listeners through his rationale.

At the beginning of the program, Levin made sure his real feelings were known. It was no secret that Levin’s first choice was not and is not Donald Trump. In fact, he boldly declared Tuesday that despite Trump’s holding some conservative policies, “Donald Trump is not a conservative … and he’s not reliable.”

Levin reiterated his position that Sen. Ted Cruz would’ve been a far better choice to champion conservative principles as president.

But that’s not what happened and … “at the end of the day, someone is going to be president.”

Levin then listed his critiques of Trump one by one. From his behavioral antics during the GOP primary to his lack of understanding when it comes to the Constitution and limited government, from his massive spending increase for infrastructure to his protectionist trade policies, and more.

It wasn’t all bad for Trump, however, as Levin later spoke positively about his tax plan, his positions on immigration, law enforcement, and foreign policy. Levin did offer a common and recurring disclaimer: Trump is NOT reliable.

Continue reading, Conservative Review

By Liz Crokin

Donald Trump is a racist, bigot, sexist, xenophobe, anti-Semitic and Islamophobe — did I miss anything? The left and the media launch these hideous kinds of attacks at Trump everyday; yet, nothing could be further from the truth about the real estate mogul. As an entertainment journalist, I’ve had the opportunity to cover Trump for over a decade, and in all my years covering him I’ve never heard anything negative about the man until he announced he was running for president. Keep in mind, I got paid a lot of money to dig up dirt on celebrities like Trump for a living so a scandalous story on the famous billionaire could’ve potentially sold a lot of magazines and would’ve been a “yuge” feather in my cap. Instead, I found that he doesn’t drink alcohol or do drugs, he’s a hardworking businessman and totally devoted to his beloved wife and children. On top of that, he’s one of the most generous celebrities in the world with a heart filled with more gold than his $100 million New York penthouse.

In 2004, the first season of “The Apprentice” aired and at that time I worked as an entertainment columnist for the “RedEye Edition of the Chicago Tribune” and as a freelancer for “Us Weekly”. I had a gut feeling that Chicago contestant, Bill Rancic, was going to win the reality show. So I contacted him and covered the hit show the entire season. I managed to score an invite to New York for the show’s grand finale and after-party. This is where I first met Trump and got to ask him a few questions. That year, Rancic did win “The Apprentice”. I attended “The Apprentice” finale the next two years in a row. Between that and the frequent visits Trump and his family made to Chicago during the construction of their Trump International Hotel & Tower, I got a chance to meet most of his family too and I’ve had nothing but positive experiences with them. Since the media has failed so miserably at reporting the truth about Trump, I decided to put together some of the acts of kindness he’s committed over three decades which has gone virtually unnoticed or fallen on deaf ears.

Continue reading, Townhall